Skip to main content

From “Taiwan Independence” to “Hong Kong Independence”: How Hong Kong Followed the Steps of Taiwan on the Road of Separatism

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Abstract

In November 2015, during the Fifth District Council election, some candidates publicly put forward political program of “Hong Kong Nation”; on 8 February 2016, a riot broke out in Mong Kok, which later disclosed by the media, was plotted by radical nativism groups; on 21 April 2016, the young and mid-aged democrats in Hong Kong released a Resolution on Hong Kong’s Future, alleging that the political status of Hong Kong should be determined by Hong Kong people by “internal self-determination”… All these signs indicate that “Hong Kong Independence” is not limited to “venting of emotions” and that “Hong Kong Independence” has evolved from an aimless trick to a well-targeted separatist movement. The wolf of “Hong Kong Independence” is really coming! Ever since the rout of “Umbrella Movement,” the appeal for “true democracy” fell through; some radical democrats turned to separatism, hence the establishment of all sort of pro-independence organizations and miscellaneous “Hong Kong Independence” slogans and theories. To be fair, the outburst of “Hong Kong Independence” has only been a few years. Whereas, these slogans and theories of “Hong Kong Independence” are of little novelty, just a few decades ago, the same kind of theory and movement were just as popular in Taiwan. As a matter of fact, by comparison of the theory of “Hong Kong Independence” with that of the “Taiwan Independence,” we can see the great influence of the latter on the former. The point of studying the separatist theory in both Taiwan and Hong Kong, or inspecting the “demonstration effect” of “Taiwan Independence” on “Hong Kong Independence,” lies within, for one, by comparing and revealing the similarities in the two: we could invoke the past experience in fighting “Taiwan Independence” to refute “Hong Kong Independence”; and for another, by disclosing the difference between Taiwan and Hong Kong, we could show the irrationality of “Hong Kong Independence” following the steps of “Taiwan Independence,” which contributes to the correction of “Hong Kong Independence” discourse.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD   119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Article 2 (b) of the San Francisco Peace Treaty stipulates that “Japan renounces all right, title and claim to Formosa and the Pescadores,” but it avoided the phrase of “Japans returns Taiwan to China.” As a matter of fact, the San Francisco Treaty was manipulated by the USA; its validity was not recognized by mainland China. See Qi Qizhang (2009). “A Pseudo Proposition: ‘Taiwan Status Unresolved’,” Exploration and Free Views, vol. 9, pp. 13–15. 戚其章:《一個偽命題:“臺灣地位未定論”》,載《探索與爭鳴》2009年第9期。

  2. 2.

    Article 1.1 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights stipulates that “All peoples have the right of self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.”

    Article 1.1 of the International Covenant on Economic Social and Cultural Rights also stipulates that “All peoples have the right of self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.”

References

  • Anonymous (2015) National consciousness and mass movement, Undergrad, vol 6, pp 45–48

    Google Scholar 

  • Brian Leung (2014) CSSA restriction revocation dispute and local political community, Undergrad, vol 2, pp 24–26

    Google Scholar 

  • Chan Ya-ming (2014) An outburst of the age: Hong Kong democratic independence, Undergrad, Sept Issue, pp 30–32

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen Kongli (2013) Taiwan popular will and group identification. Jiuzhou Publishing House, Beijing, p 13

    Google Scholar 

  • Chin Wan (2012) Hong Kong City-State. Enrich Publishing, Hong Kong, pp 56, 59, 218

    Google Scholar 

  • Di Chengguang (2007) Formation and development of Deng Xiao- ping’s ‘One Country, Two Systems’ conception. Hist Res Anhui 3:69–76

    Google Scholar 

  • Huang Yuexi (2016) ‘Hong Kong City-State’, ‘Hong Kong Nation’ and their negative effects, Expanding Horizons, pp 38–42

    Google Scholar 

  • Hung Ho-fung (2014) Incomplete state nation, self-determined city-state: Hong Kong issue under the Chinese nation state construction dilemma in the 20th century, in HKUSU ed. Hong Kong Nation, p 125

    Google Scholar 

  • Jack Lee (2014) Should Hong Kong have the right of national self-determination?, Undergrad, vol 2, pp 34–37

    Google Scholar 

  • Joseph Lian Yi-zheng (2012) Passport and nationality: on Hong Kong people becoming national minority, Hong Kong Eco J, 2012-01-06

    Google Scholar 

  • Lau Siu-kai (2013) How to understand Hong Kong nativism, Ta Kong Po, 2013-05-30 (A14)

    Google Scholar 

  • Liao Wen-i (1994) Taiwan civilianism, cf. Ng Chiau-tong, post-war Taiwan independence movement and the development of Taiwan nationalism. In: Shih Cheng-feng (ed) Taiwan Nationalism. Avanguard Press, Taipei, p 200

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin Jin (1990) The guiding ideology and theoretical characteristics of the current overseas Taiwan independence movement. Taiwan Res Q 1:17–24

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin Jin (1992) The proposition of ‘Taiwan Self-determination’ and the future of Taiwan. Taiwan Res Q 4:16–26

    Google Scholar 

  • Shen Huiping (2009) A brief analysis on the contemporary ‘Taiwanese Nationalism. Guizhou Ethnic Stud 5:7–13

    Google Scholar 

  • Shi Ming (1994) Taiwan nation: formation and development, cf. Ng Chiau-tong, post-war Taiwan independence movement and the development of Taiwan nationalism. In: Shih Cheng-feng (ed) Taiwan Nationalism. Avanguard Press, Taipei, p 209

    Google Scholar 

  • Shih Cheng-feng (2002) Self-determination: a nationalist viewpoint of Taiwan independence, cf. Zhu Songling, Xu Chongde, Yi Saijian (2010) criticism of the theoretical source of ‘Jurisprudent Independence of Taiwan’. J Fujian Normal Univ Philos Soc Sci Edn 3:7–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Shih Ming (1980) Modern history of Taiwanese in 400 years. Paradise Culture Associates, Taipei, p 688

    Google Scholar 

  • Su Ge (1997) Tracking the source of ‘Unresolved Status of Taiwan’ theory. Taiwan Stud 2:48–54

    Google Scholar 

  • Su Ge (1998) America’s China policy and the issue of Taiwan. World Affairs Press, Beijing, p 27

    Google Scholar 

  • Sun Yinghao (2006) Five theories of ‘Taiwan Independence’ aim at secession. Ideol Polit Educ Res 3:16–18

    Google Scholar 

  • Tian Feilong (2015) Transition of social movements and the evolution of the basic law in Hong Kong. China Law Rev 3:67–74

    Google Scholar 

  • Tian Feilong (2016) ‘Self-determination’ misunderstood the Hong Kong basic law, shall never go anywhere, Ta Kung Pao, 2016-05-04 (A12)

    Google Scholar 

  • Timothy Wong Ka-ying (2004) More defiance than obedience: Hong Kong and Taiwan’s response to the China factor under electoral politics, Twenty-First Century, vol 1, pp 20–25

    Google Scholar 

  • Tso Hiu-nok (2014) Behind Hong-Konger is the whole cultural system, Undergrad, Feb Issue, pp 31–33

    Google Scholar 

  • Victor Zheng, Wan Po-san (2014) The local consciousness of Hong Kong people: social-economic and political perspective on identity. Hong Kong Macao J 3:66–78

    Google Scholar 

  • Victor Zheng, Wong Siu-lun (2008) Identity: a comparative study of Taiwan, Hong Kong and Macau. Mod China Stud:127–141

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang Jianmin (2015) Similarities and differences between the political developments in Hong Kong and Taiwan. Reunification Forum 3:9–13

    Google Scholar 

  • Wong Chun-kit (2014) Nativism is the only way for Hong Kong people’s struggle, Undergrad, Feb Issue, pp 27–30

    Google Scholar 

  • Yau Lop-poon (2015) Hong Kong independence, Taiwan independence, Historical Amnesia, Lianhe Zaobao, 2015-04-10

    Google Scholar 

  • Yuan Wei (2003) On the abuse of ‘Taiwanese Nation. Taiwan Stud 2:31–35

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang Li (2007) A study on the “Referendum” of Taiwan. Jiuzhou Publishing House, Beijing, pp 72, 76–132

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhao Yong (2008) Political transition in Taiwan and secession. Central Compilation & Translation Press, Beijing, p 232

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhu Jie (2015) Democratic independence: Taiwan’s story and Hong Kong’s future. Hong Kong Macao J 4:29–38

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhu Songling, Xu Chongde, Yi Saijian (2010) Criticism of the theoretical source of ‘Jurisprudent Independence of Taiwan’. J Fujian Normal Univ Philos Soc Sci Edn 3:7–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhu Weidong (1996) An analysis of the ‘Taiwan Independence’ theories. Soc Sci J Hainan Univ 3:86–94

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Zhu, J., Zhang, X. (2019). From “Taiwan Independence” to “Hong Kong Independence”: How Hong Kong Followed the Steps of Taiwan on the Road of Separatism. In: Critique of Hong Kong Nativism. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-3344-6_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-3344-6_5

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-13-3343-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-13-3344-6

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics